Afer the pre-trrial review - help required !!!!
Discussion
On Friday I probably "shot myself in the foot" (hopefully not fatally!!) by quoting DPP v Pickford in my defence at a pre-trial review.
The prosecution argued that they had never heard of the case, and asked me to provide a full copy of the judgement.
As I am the one that brought it up, rather than the prosecution, it is now encumbent upon me to provide it.
Has anybody got access to the full judgement, or might you know where I can get hold of it? Can you, for example, e-mail a link?
Heres hoping !!!!!
The prosecution argued that they had never heard of the case, and asked me to provide a full copy of the judgement.
As I am the one that brought it up, rather than the prosecution, it is now encumbent upon me to provide it.
Has anybody got access to the full judgement, or might you know where I can get hold of it? Can you, for example, e-mail a link?
Heres hoping !!!!!
www.safespeed.org.uk/pickford.html
From the bottom of the case report:
The Court accepted that there was a lacuna in the law in that although the registered keeper is under a duty to identify the driver he is not required to make a witness statement to that effect. While this might be an unattractive finding it was not the Court's function to fill in or remedy defective legislation. This was the function of Parliament.
And when you go to the next stage, make sure you have your own copies of both Yorke & Mawdesley and DPP -v- Broomfield; not that you want to bring them up, but there's at least one example of where the CPS have provided an edited in their favour version of Y&M.
>> Edited by jeffreyarcher on Saturday 6th December 13:29
From the bottom of the case report:
The Court accepted that there was a lacuna in the law in that although the registered keeper is under a duty to identify the driver he is not required to make a witness statement to that effect. While this might be an unattractive finding it was not the Court's function to fill in or remedy defective legislation. This was the function of Parliament.
And when you go to the next stage, make sure you have your own copies of both Yorke & Mawdesley and DPP -v- Broomfield; not that you want to bring them up, but there's at least one example of where the CPS have provided an edited in their favour version of Y&M.
>> Edited by jeffreyarcher on Saturday 6th December 13:29
jeffreyarcher said:
<a href="http://www.safespeed.org.uk/pickford.html"><a href="http://www.safespeed.org.uk/pickford.html">www.safespeed.org.uk/pickford.html</a></a>
From the bottom of the case report:
The Court accepted that there was a lacuna in the law in that although the registered keeper is under a duty to identify the driver he is not required to make a witness statement to that effect. While this might be an unattractive finding it was not the Court's function to fill in or remedy defective legislation. This was the function of Parliament.
And when you go to the next stage, make sure you have your own copies of both Yorke & Mawdesley and DPP -v- Broomfield; not that you want to bring them up, but there's at least one example of where the CPS have provided an edited in their favour version of Y&M.
Doesn't that fall under the heading of, "Attempting to pervert the course of justice"? And, assuming that was not the work of a single individual, isn't there a potential 'Conspiracy' charge there? - Streaky
>> Edited by streaky on Saturday 6th December 13:51
rs1952,
I have just received a crappy still as photo evidence which they will be using against me.
I have pleaded not guilty to failure to provide and speeding. At the moment I'm just not sure what to do next. Did they show you the photographic evidence?
Is that alone enough proof, or is the signed NIP a requirement as well?
Cheers,
Wim
I have just received a crappy still as photo evidence which they will be using against me.
I have pleaded not guilty to failure to provide and speeding. At the moment I'm just not sure what to do next. Did they show you the photographic evidence?
Is that alone enough proof, or is the signed NIP a requirement as well?
Cheers,
Wim
I'd be reluctant to accept internet printouts as categorical statements. That said, try court service official web site. It's trusted and bench can verify it themselves in chambers these days.
Best solution is old fashioned paper copies. If any local university they will have reports, ask CAB, or a local solicitor if they would in return for their copying costs.
If CPS haven't heard of it, send them it's full citation in advance, you know the 2003 AER ... bit. They can then look it up themselves.
Who knows, even any English solicitors on PH could copy it for you.
If you are taking it along to court, take a few copies, usually 4.
Best solution is old fashioned paper copies. If any local university they will have reports, ask CAB, or a local solicitor if they would in return for their copying costs.
If CPS haven't heard of it, send them it's full citation in advance, you know the 2003 AER ... bit. They can then look it up themselves.
Who knows, even any English solicitors on PH could copy it for you.
If you are taking it along to court, take a few copies, usually 4.
Go to www.lawtel.co.uk which provides 95% of the case law and transcripts and is used by the majority opf us in the legal profession.
You may ned to register, but I am pretty sure you can do a basic search free of charge.
You may ned to register, but I am pretty sure you can do a basic search free of charge.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff